Call to ban the burqa in Australia

[DrKarlKid]

Core issue here is that of security. Just as one is prevented from wearing a ski mask, a motorcycle helmet, etc. whilst walking around in public places, the same should be implemented against the burqa. The 'right' to wear such cultural dress (as they aren't religious) wouldn't be an issue if done in the privacy of one's home. Neither is walking around in a bike helmet at home.

Don't quite understand the argument of whether or not women choose to or not to wear the burqa has to do with the core issue of why this ban is being implemented. Whatever the personal motivations are of the politicians pushing this ban is moot...

What's laughable is the women's emancipation angle and how this ban is a hinderance to women's rights.

1. a ban is not seriously being considered within Australia

2. it is not against the law to wear a ski mask/ helmet in public places you just get more attention then you probably want.

the funny thing is that shops and banks are private property so a ban on wearing a burqa in public would not stop people from wearing them in shops and banks. these places are within their rights to set whatever dress code they like

 

[lionking]

Also refering to my previous statement i looked for the source and found it i misquoted it states an approximation of 2000 then i checked where the comment came from and found that i am seriously embarrased to have quoted such a imbecilic person so i am not going to post it

Thanks. Classy admission.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Core issue here is that of security. Just as one is prevented from wearing a ski mask, a motorcycle helmet, etc. whilst walking around in public places, the same should be implemented against the burqa. The 'right' to wear such cultural dress (as they aren't religious) wouldn't be an issue if done in the privacy of one's home. Neither is walking around in a bike helmet at home.

Don't quite understand the argument of whether or not women choose to or not to wear the burqa has to do with the core issue of why this ban is being implemented. Whatever the personal motivations are of the politicians pushing this ban is moot...

Fair enough.

What's laughable is the women's emancipation angle and how this ban is a hinderance to women's rights.

Why?

 

[TragicMonkey]

Nice strawman.

In the name of collective security we forbid people to dress in a way that hides their identity.

Unless you know everybody by sight, seeing their face does not tell you their identity anyway.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Do these women really choose for themselves to wear the burqa?

It seems it doesn't matter, because even if they choose to everyone will just say they can't have chosen freely and must have been forced to.

Of course I'm also assuming there's a difference between suburban Australia and a small village in Yemen. Am I wrong about that?

 

[TragicMonkey]

Nice mindreading.

Nice contribution.

I suppose someone could express an interest in emancipating someone out of spite, or out of a desire to harm them. It would just be kind of unusual.

 

[lionking]

Of course I'm also assuming there's a difference between suburban Australia and a small village in Yemen. Am I wrong about that?

To fundamentalist muslims, you may well be wrong.

 

[Orphia Nay]

It seems it doesn't matter, because even if they choose to everyone will just say they can't have chosen freely and must have been forced to.

Why would they choose to? I really want to know.

 

[TragicMonkey]

To fundamentalist muslims, you may well be wrong.

And what if the fundamentalist Muslims happen to be female, and want to wear a burqa? Is it because they're women that we have to always assume they are victims? Yeah, maybe they are oppressed. But maybe they aren't. Maybe they prefer it. Maybe, and I realize this is going to be beyond a lot of people reading this, maybe they believe their religion and culture and choose to follow it. Just because other people think it's crazy or awful doesn't mean they should be stopped.

Which is why I suggest leaving it up to the individual to choose how to dress. Because Australia, which is almost a First-World nation, presumably won't stop an oppressed Muslim wife who decides to give up that style of dress. She can stop whenever she wants to, so continuing to dress that way means she must want to.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Why would they choose to? I really want to know.

Ask them.

You sound like my mother, on the topic of atheism. "You can't really believe that." "Yes, I do." "Oh, you must mean something else. You couldn't possibly not believe in God." "No, I don't." "Oh, that can't be true. You must believe in God in some way."

Your inability to fathom other people's choices doesn't give you the right to take away their right to choose.

Hell, I can't see the appeal of seafood, silicone lip injections, or heterosexuality but that doesn't mean I'm ready to forbid anybody from having those things. Nor do I insist they justify their choices because I don't share their tastes or motivations.

 

[lionking]

Which is why I suggest leaving it up to the individual to choose how to dress. Because Australia, which is almost a First-World nation, presumably won't stop an oppressed Muslim wife who decides to give up that style of dress. She can stop whenever she wants to, so continuing to dress that way means she must want to.

Gratuitious insult noted.

Someone walking down the street naked would soon be arrested, even if their religion sanctioned it. Someone walking down the high street with a t-shirt proclaiming "kill all jews/blacks/irish/whatever" would soon be arrested for breaching the peace. Just as there is no absolute freedom of speech in a civilised, not quite first world nation, there is also likewise no absolute freedom of how you choose to (un)dress.

And your insistence that a muslim woman can always choose to "stop whenever she wants to" is just bizarre.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Someone walking down the street naked would soon be arrested, even if their religion sanctioned it. Someone walking down the high street with a t-shirt proclaiming "kill all jews/blacks/irish/whatever" would soon be arrested for breaching the peace. Just as there is no absolute freedom of speech in a civilised, not quite first world nation, there is also likewise no absolute freedom of how you choose to (un)dress.

I guess it's because I'm American. Here, we let people be stupid or crazy if they want to, and aren't hurting anybody, and don't require them to justify themselves if they make an unpopular choice.

And your insistence that a muslim woman can always choose to "stop whenever she wants to" is just bizarre.

I'm insisting that an Australian woman can most likely choose how she dresses, what with living in Australia and all. What's stopping an Australian Muslim lady from dressing as she likes? At least until your government enacts a dress code for them, anyway.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Ask them.

I don't know any. You sometimes seem like a knowledgeable person, which is why I asked you.

You sound like my mother, on the topic of atheism. "You can't really believe that." "Yes, I do." "Oh, you must mean something else. You couldn't possibly not believe in God." "No, I don't." "Oh, that can't be true. You must believe in God in some way."

Woah. Overreaction alert! I asked a simple, genuine question, since this is a discussion forum, and you totally exaggerated it.

Your inability to fathom other people's choices doesn't give you the right to take away their right to choose.

Do I make the laws? Thanks for overestimating my powers, I guess.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Oh, just forget it. I'm bored already. Muslim women in Australia can't be trusted to choose to dress the right way, and if they dress the wrong way they're either doing it because they're forced to or because they're incapable of making the choice. Therefore the choice should be taken away from them, because it threatens the national security of all of Australia.

 

[lionking]

What's stopping an Australian Muslim lady from dressing as she likes?

Jeez, are you doing this on purpose? Her husband.

 

[bigjelmapro]

Why?

Why would it? To me this is as silly as putting slave emacipation on hold because banana plantation lords might not let their slaves off the plantation.

This ban is a necessary step towards, primarily, security as with the stated case above (of which there are many to choose from), and secondary, that this cultural practice of dressing up women as multi-colored 'casper the ghost' outfits should not belong in Western societies.

I realize that people might start shooting off other examples of what should not be permitted in Western societies and how this might be seen as unconstitutional in a free-society, but this is an extreme example that can't possibly be supported by sane people...

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

So... because in people's opinion it's wrong to wear it we should mandate our opinions on them?

Hmm. I'm pretty sure this is wrong...

 

[Earthborn]

Why would it? To me this is as silly as putting slave emacipation on hold because banana plantation lords might not let their slaves off the plantation.

A closer analogy would be to do absolutely nothing for slave emancipation except making it illegal to wear shackles in public. You can't make someone free by forbidding something s/he may not be doing voluntarily to begin with.

 

[bigjelmapro]

A closer analogy would be to do absolutely nothing for slave emancipation except making it illegal to wear shackles in public. You can't make someone free by forbidding something s/he may not be doing voluntarily to begin with.

Wasn't necessarily going for an analogy there or even a strong correlation. Was rather providing a counter example for this falty reasoning for not taking action against something that's obviously primitive and crude and runs counter to a free society for fear that some people might take it out against those people whom are involved in these practices.

This is of course secondary to the primary motivation of this ban.

 

[PogoPedant]

Jeez, are you doing this on purpose? Her husband.

The husband believes he owns his wife; that she is his property.

The husband believes that he cannot let his wife out of the house without covering up her face.

It becomes illegal to cover the face in public.

What is the logical thing for the husband to do?